I've posted a message before complaining I can't seem to be able to shoot 22LR accurately.

Well, things haven't improved much lately. Here is what really puzzles me: I can shoot 9mm relatively ok, at 10 yard I can easily make the holes touching each other(BTW, I don't consider myself a seasoned shooter, I am fairly new to the game). but when I shoot 22LR, they just gone wild, sometimes even miss the letter size target completely.

What's your experience with 22LR? Are they inherently not as accurate as center fire?

In my experience, 22's are inherently accurate. Individual guns can be picky as to what ammo they like. I had a revolver that would not shoot high velocity ammo very well. Only liked subsonic stuff. Best to buy a few boxes of different ammo & see what happens.

Your ultra high velocity ammo will likly not be as accurate. I shot in competition about 35 years ago and found out that Winchester Wildcats were bad as far as accuracy. I tried to tell my brother in law but he said it didn't matter he couldn't hit anything no how.

I could typically shoot a 96 to 98 with many 100s and if I remember correctly I used the old Remmington standard verlocity waxed bullets. These bueelts had the appearence of bronze or gold slugs but waxed.

Now if you want to get into extreme eccuracy then you have to do one of thwo things, waste hundreds of dolloars on ammo trying to find just the right fodder for your pistol or buy a rim fire rim thickness guage. This is what a good many of the pros use and I've read they can get away using regular ammo where as the other guys will spend really big bucks for what is termed premium or presorted ammo.

The .22LR cartridge, as has been noted, is inherently an extremely accurate round. Test targets that accompany top shelf firearms routinely show one hole t en shot groups at test distances (usually 25 yards).
But...not all guns can achieve this level of accuracy. What gun are you using?
Pete

My MKII Ruger can easily keep all 10 rounds of CCI Mini-mags in a skoal can at 20 yds, with iron sights if I do my part.
Switch to Winchester Dynapoints, and I'm hard pressed to keep them all in a 2liter bottle at the same distance, plus it jams.
Other brands are in between.

In my Marlin 39A, they about all shoot good (different point of impact though).

There is nothing wrong with the accuracy of 22LR bullets. That' can't however, be said for all the guns that shoot it.
I've shoot three Rossi 22's and none of those were a long way from being anything close to accurate. A clean barrel is also necessary. If it's gets leaded, accuracy is going out the window.
The thing with the 22LR is, since you can't reload them, you have to try numbers of different bullets to find the one that gun shoots best. I keep a huge selecton ( a box of almost every type made) I use to for testing to see which the gun likes best. You might not want to go quite to that extreme (that's over $200 worh of assorted bullets) but pick up several different weight and velocity loads and let your gun tell you what it likes.

There is nothing wrong with the accuracy of 22LR bullets. That' can't however, be said for all the guns that shoot it.

I've had one .22LR that wouldn't shoot in the last 50years of swapping and playing with a .22. The other 2dz or so rifles were up to 1/2-3/4" groups at 50yds, many of the handguns I've owned would shoot 1" at 25yds.

All of them shot the best with a specific brand of ammo. Sometimes the results are surprising. My 77/22VBZ is very good with Winchester HS ammo, but doesn't shoot Remington HS for beans, and is just as bad with Federal and Remington match ammo ???? My 10/22 loves Remington Copperhead and Viper stuff, shoots mediocre with regular HS, and poorly with the Winchester ammo. My Single Six needs a scope and rest to see much difference, and my MKI 6 7/8" target auto shoots pretty much anything well. My P22 needs HS Remington to work reliably, and not the bulk pak stuff which jams frequently, and is poor for accuracy.

I used to clean 22 rifles and pistols. For years I have not touched them. The accuracy seems to get better and better. Can't explain it. If the accuracy does drop off, I will definitely clean the barrel.

May I suggest that you look around for a shooting range offering Bullseye matches. Bullseye shooting is not real exciting, it's shooting disipline, requiring practice and patience. I've found most of the fellows at the matches would be most pleased to help you learn.

Not wishing to start a holy war ( ) but some makes and models of ammunition aren't that great. I've never been happy with the way that Thunderbolt shoots, for instance. All too often it doesn't shoot at all, and you get the "click" instead of the "bang." Make sure you're using good quality .22 ammunition. My favorites are Federal "550-in-a-box" for general shooting and Federal Automatch when I'm getting more serious. I'm sure that others may have preferences they'd like to offer.

I don't clean my .22's either, unless I notice that accuracy is falling off as a previous poster wrote. The ordnance steel used to make .22-cal barrels is softer than that used to make higher-pressure arms, and it is therefore more susceptible to wear. People I shoot smallbore with clean their target rifles - maybe - once a year. The lube on .22 bullets is a decent rust preventative, and with modern non-corrosive priming there's little to worry about. Semi-autos may need more frequent cleaning and lubrication to keep their actions working properly. Arms that are infrequently used may also need to be cleaned before storage, while one used ( and therefore inspected ) every weekend would not.

. . . What's your experience with 22LR? Are they inherently not as accurate as center fire?

IME, most of the shooters that I've shot with in NRA Bullseys competition shoot their best scores during the rimfire matches so that should give you some idea of the inherent accuracy of the .22 LR. It's not unusual to see the .22 LR turn in better scores than many center fire cartridges due to the low recoil and excellent accuracy.

It is the ammo, get over it. None is made as good as it was long ago.
The Ruger, the 41, the browning and the High Standard are all capable of one hole groups at 25 yards.
I shot these at 50 and 25 yards with CCI Minie Mags and then with RWS target loads. Yes, there are 9 shots in almost one hole and I blew the last shot. I was crazy seeing the Ruger do that and just fell apart.
It is the ammo. None will match .22's loaded years ago.
Your wonderful guns are held back by the ammo you buy.

OK Guys. Thanks for all the reply. I went to range again yesterday and tried all the 22LR they offer to rental. This is what I found out:
22LR ammo is accurate, there's no question on that. but not all 22LR guns are created equal.
I tried Walther P22, Sig Mosquito, a Taurus revolver and a S&W revolver. None of them yield satisfying accuracy, the Walther P22 is extremely bad, it jams almost every other shot.
Then I tried a beretta(Forgot the model, I think it was a U22?). Finally I got what I want. That is a very accurate pistol. According to the salesman, the Ruger Mark III is equally good although I didn't have time to verify.

What amazing is, the Beretta U22 is not an expensive gun at all(although weird looking if you ask me).

All of you have had .22's that have gone bing, pop, crack, poop and not fire at all. Long ago, ALL ammo made a "crack".
A K22 was just super but not anymore. A Ruger will shoot with the best target .22 in the world. Not with poor ammo.
Find a gun that does better with any ammo and it is luck. You only had a good batch of ammo.
Your guns are better then you think.
Eley, Lapua and a lot of extreme target ammo is gun and twist specific. Most of our guns want high speed stuff. Go over or under and it won't work.
The problem is that most ammo that fits is poorly made.

my wife has a Taurus 22 lr revolver
I take it when I wank our dog
we walk in an area that takes us to an abandoned grave pit
well there is a 4x4 post that was bulldozed into a pile next to a cliff face
when I reach that part of the walk I always take a shot at it
over a hundred yards and I hit it not always but on occasion
yes indeed they are surprisingly accurate
best

__________________
The clock of life is wound but once,
And no man has the power
To tell just when the hands will stop
At late or early hour.
Now is the only time you own.
Live, love, toil with a will.
Place no faith in time.
For the clock may soon be still.

All of you have had .22's that have gone bing, pop, crack, poop and not fire at all. Long ago, ALL ammo made a "crack".
A K22 was just super but not anymore. A Ruger will shoot with the best target .22 in the world. Not with poor ammo.
Find a gun that does better with any ammo and it is luck. You only had a good batch of ammo.
Your guns are better then you think.
Eley, Lapua and a lot of extreme target ammo is gun and twist specific. Most of our guns want high speed stuff. Go over or under and it won't work.
The problem is that most ammo that fits is poorly made.

Thirty five years ago I shot .22 pistol in competition. The first couple times I used my brother in law's Ruger. He couldn't shoot a target with a score over 65 with it, I don't remember what I did with it, but it didn't take me long to figure out that I would never be able to compete with that gun.

So I bought a High Standard competition. I shot most targets either 98 or a perfect 100, but never less then a 96 and I didn't use fancy ammo, Just plain old Remington Hi-Speed.

I shot most targets either 98 or a perfect 100, but never less then a 96

Then you made Master in a very short time. That kind of shooting shows a remarkable talent.
Did you ever go to the National Matches at Camp Perry. With scores like that, you could have been National Champion (maybe you were).
I agree with your evaluation of the Ruger. As much as I like the Mark II that I own....even with the trigger work, it does not compare to my High Standard.

Then you made Master in a very short time. That kind of shooting shows a remarkable talent.
Did you ever go to the National Matches at Camp Perry. With scores like that, you could have been National Champion (maybe you were).
I agree with your evaluation of the Ruger. As much as I like the Mark II that I own....even with the trigger work, it does not compare to my High Standard.

Pete

Ahh thanks for the feather that I will not put in my cap. I never thought of myself as being that good, better then most maybe. But the gun was truely remarkable, and I learned very quickly how to shoot. If I remember right an old timer gave me a simple tip and that was all it took.

I( never competed in national competition or at Camp Perry, didn't realize at the time about competition of that caliber.

I really am curious though to know if the newer Rugers are better. I wouldn't have even taken one of those old models home free if offered it no charge. A true waste of ammo.

Anyone who thinks the gun makes no difference has never shot a truely great gun, and I was told that mine was not the best. Paid $125 for it brand new

If you never shot anything worse than a 96, you were averaging high Master class scores.
Just for reference sake, the 2011 .22 Championship at the National Matches was won by Greg Derr who shot an 883-45X/900, slightly better than 98 average for each of the nine targets.
If you were to shoot a 96, 98, 100 for an NMC of 294, and did that three times, you'd be within a point of Derr's score.
I know some very fine shooters who have been at this for years and who cannot shoot high master class scores consistently. (myself among them).
Pete